@FreeInChrist
You stated that it would be “preposterous/absurd” to suggest that the saints of the Old Testament acted in faith apart from being born again ~ that the Spirit of God must have already regenerated them in order for them to do what Hebrews 11 records.
Rather than continue that discussion inside another thread, I wanted to open a separate space specifically on this question:
I stand upon that statement, I also gave reasons as to why believe that to be so. See post
2478 at the link below.
I'm not going to take a stand on whether or not atonement is limited or sufficient for all because I honestly don't know.
I'd just like to hear from non-Calvinists as to how they reconcile their view of atonement with the fact that not all people will be saved. Isn't that, by definition, limited atonement? Or is there another explanation?
Were Old Testament saints regenerated (born again) in the same sense as New Covenant believers?
That's a no brainer
@FreeInChrist, that truly requires very little spiritual understanding if one has an average understanding of the
new covenant, by which covenant, all of the elect are under from both testaments. This within itself should prove that all are born again in the same manner, the only difference that I can think of is NT believers enjoy a better
understanding of this great salvation purchased and secured by Jesus Christ.
I do not deny predestination. I fully believe that certain individuals — such as Jeremiah, the prophets, the apostles, and others — were set apart by God for specific purposes in redemptive history (Jeremiah 1:5 being an obvious example).
If you only believe in predestination for
service only, then you do reject predestination
as taught in the scriptures since it always
has its roots in God's election of his people to salvation from sin and condemnation, and then follows God predestinate
many areas of the elect's life to brings His eternal purposes to perfect fruition.
Unconditional Election by grace alone is to be preached and published,
first, because it is brought forward all through the Scriptures. There is hardly not a single book in the Word of God where election is not either expressly stated, strikingly illustrated, or clearly implied.
Genesis is full of it: the difference which the Lord made between Nahor and Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac, and His loving Jacob and hating Esau are cases to the point.
In Exodus we behold the distinction made by God between the Egyptians and the Hebrews.
In Leviticus the atonement and all the sacrifices
were for the people of God only, nor were they bidden to go and “offer” them to the surrounding heathen.
In Numbers Jehovah used a Balaam to herald the fact that Israel were “the people” who “shall dwell
alone, and shall not be numbered among the nations” (23:9); and therefore was he constrained to cry “How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, and thy tabernacles, 0 Israel” (24:5).
In Deuteronomy it is recorded “The Lord’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance” (32:9).
In Joshua we behold the discriminating mercy of the Lord bestowed upon Rahab the harlot, while the whole of her city was doomed to destruction
. In Judges the sovereignty of God appears in the unlikely instruments selected, by which He wrought victory
for Israel: Deborah, Gideon, Samson.
In Ruth we have Orpah kissing her mother-in-law and returning to her gods, whereas Ruth cleaves to her and obtained inheritance in Israel ~
who made them to differ?
In
1st Samuel David is chosen for the throne, preferred to his older brethren. In
2nd Samuel we learn of the everlasting covenant “ordered in all things, and sure” (23:5). In
1st Kings Elijah becomes a blessing to a single widow selected from many; while in
2nd Kings Naaman alone, of all the lepers, was cleansed. In
1st Chronicles it is written “Ye children of Jacob, His chosen ones” (16:13); while in
2nd Chronicles we are made to marvel at the grace of God bestowing repentance upon Manasseh. And so we might go on. The
Psalms, Prophets, Gospels and Epistles are so full of this doctrine that he who runs may read.
Second, the doctrine of unconditional election is to be prominently preached because the gospel
cannot be Scripturally proclaimed without it.
“The gospel of God” (Romans 1:1) can only be Scripturally presented as God is owned and honored therein. The attenuated “gospel” of our degenerate age confines the attention of its hearers to the sacrifice of Christ, whereas salvation originated in the heart of God the Father and is consummated by the operations of the Spirit of God. All the blessings of salvation are communicated according to God’s eternal counsels, and it was for the whole of election of grace (
and none others) that Christ wrought salvation.
The very first chapter of the New Testament announces that Jesus “shall save His people from their sins:”
not “MAY,” but “SHALL”; not shall offer to or try to, but actually “save” them. Again;
not a single soul had ever benefited from the death of Christ if the Spirit had not been given to apply its virtues to the chosen seed. Any man, then, who omits the Father’s election, and the Spirit’s sovereign and effectual operations,
preaches not the gospel of God, no matter what be his reputation as a “soul winner".
So, why do you reject unconditional election by grace alone?
However, I do not automatically conclude from that language that;
1. Every believer in the Old Testament was regenerated in the New Covenant sense, or
2.That faith itself was irresistibly infused rather than responsively exercised.
Hebrews 11 repeatedly says “by faith” ~ it presents their faith as active trust in response to God’s revealed word. The text does not explicitly state they were born again prior to believing.
You said: "Every believer in the Old Testament was regenerated in the New Covenant sense," then see my proofs from:
https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/the-issue-of-limited-atonement.944/page-124 post 2478
May add more proof later today.
You said: "That faith itself was irresistibly infused rather than responsively exercised."
Your point that it is responsively exercised, has many scriptures condemning that position. Romans 8:7,8 John 1:13; Matthew 11:25-27; 16:17; etc.
You said: "Hebrews 11 repeatedly says “by faith” ~ it presents their faith as active trust in response to God’s revealed word. The text does not explicitly state they were born again prior to believing."
What we know 100% is the Holy Ghost is speaking of children of God, not one word about the Egyptians, or any other nations whom God did not set his love upon.
Deuteronomy 7:7,8
“The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye
were the fewest of all people:
But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.”
Why in the world would you and others go to Hebrews 11 when it is
only speaking about men/women that God set his love upon and choose them to be his people.
